Angela Rayner defends removing ‘beauty’ requirement from new planning rules for homes – UK politics live
Rayner Defends Removing Beauty Requirement
Vine stated that Labour has eliminated the need for attractive appearance in planning.
This is absurd. The concept of beauty is highly subjective. In reality, there are many detailed specifications within the planning guidelines that focus on harmonizing with the surrounding environment.
Everyone has their own perception of beauty.
It's all about blending in with the surroundings, taking care of the environment, and having easy access to nature. It's important to ensure that buildings are secure, comfortable, and environmentally friendly. Developers must adhere to various guidelines and regulations in order to achieve this.
Attractive? Attractive holds different meanings for different people. It's not always easy to define.
Vine is questioning something. He is saying that there are unattractive houses.
And they've navigated the system successfully, with a focus on aesthetics.
The excessive use of language was inhibiting progress and growth. This is why we consider it to be overly subjective.
In fact, the regulations and policies in place necessitate that there must be discussions, adherence to guidelines regarding building aesthetics, ensuring building safety, and maintaining the historical architecture of our mill towns in Yorkshire. These regulations serve as safeguards and rules to protect the integrity of the structures.
I don't agree with the notion that I will only construct unattractive houses. That statement is simply not accurate.
Yesterday, a preliminary version of the updated national planning policy framework was released. It included a tracking feature that indicated where wording had been removed from the previous version. One notable change was the deletion of mentions requiring homes or locations to be aesthetically pleasing. An example of this can be seen in the revised draft.
However, the document still contains numerous mentions of the significance of beauty in rural areas.
Voters Back More Homes, Not On Green Belt - Poll
According to recent polling by YouGov, voters support the government's proposal to significantly increase housebuilding by a ratio of two to one. Additionally, when asked if they would support the construction of a large number of new homes in their own neighborhoods, a majority of 52% are in favor compared to 41% who are not.
However, the survey also indicates that voters are against certain strategies that ministers are proposing to achieve a significant increase in the construction of homes. The research shows that people are more inclined to object rather than support the idea of ministers having the power to overturn councils' decisions to reject planning applications. Additionally, the majority of respondents (approximately two thirds) are against the idea of constructing new homes on protected green belt land.
Taylor Wimpey Supports Labour's Planning Changes
Taylor Wimpey is happy about Labour's planning ideas as a significant first move in providing more houses in England. However, their profits dropped by almost 60% in the first half of the year.
If you have a long break coming up and haven't decided on a book to read yet, consider checking out No Way Out by Tim Shipman. It is one of the top political books I've come across this year and have yet to recommend. Shipman, who is the chief political commentator for the Sunday Times, has already published two excellent books on Brexit politics prior to the 2019 election. However, No Way Out is even better. The book focuses mainly on the last year and a half of Theresa May's time as prime minister and her unsuccessful attempts to negotiate a Brexit deal. Shipman expertly recounts this tumultuous period in our country's politics and offers insightful explanations that are unmatched.
This might seem like a distant memory now, but Keir Starmer has been emphasizing that his priority in government will be putting the country before his political party. One noteworthy detail mentioned by Shipman is from a cabinet meeting in early 2019, where ministers debated that maintaining unity within the Tory party was more crucial than preventing the negative economic effects of a no-deal Brexit.
High-ranking government officials were surprised to learn that a no-deal Brexit was now being considered as an option. They were also shocked by the reasoning behind this decision. One official revealed that during a cabinet meeting, it was stated that keeping the Conservative party together was more important than avoiding a no-deal Brexit. This realization forced the officials to confront the ideology at play in politics. The belief that the Conservative party was the key to Britain's success had become ingrained in their minds. When the official cabinet minutes were being written, the civil servant in charge highlighted the fact that ministers had prioritized the interests of the Tory party over the nation. This observation angered Theresa May when her aide, JoJo Penn, pointed it out. May insisted that the wording be changed, but the civil servants stood their ground and refused to alter it.
A Treasury minister is under investigation by Parliament's ethics oversight committee, marking the first time such a probe has been conducted since the last election, according to a report by PA Media.
Tulip Siddiq, who serves as the economic secretary to the Treasury and represents the constituency of Hampstead and Highgate, is currently being looked into for not registering her interests on time. This information can be found on the parliamentary standards commissioner's website.
The investigation is believed to be connected to Siddiq's failure to report rental earnings from a London property, according to a Labour representative who stated it was a small mistake that she had already apologized for.
The representative stated: "Tulip will work closely with the parliamentary commissioner on standards regarding this issue."
Siddiq is the inaugural MP of the recently elected parliament to be officially looked into by the standards commissioner.
However, the inquiries into the actions of three ex-MPs that commenced in the previous Parliament are still ongoing.
Ex-Conservative MP Bob Stewart is under investigation for not disclosing a conflict of interest and reportedly not cooperating with the watchdog's investigation.
Former Conservative Party member Andrew Bridgen, who is now part of the Reclaim Party, is currently under investigation for failing to properly report his financial interests. Additionally, former Tory politician Sir Conor Burns is facing scrutiny for potentially misusing confidential information he had access to.
In the previous term of government, the ethics overseer launched over 100 inquiries into Members of Parliament, most of which were addressed through a process called "rectification." This process enables MPs to fix small or unintended violations of parliamentary regulations.
I was curious if you heard back from the DHSC yesterday about why the former government said that resolving the junior doctors' dispute would cost £1.7 billion?
Yesterday on the blog, there was a discussion about Victoria Atkins, who is in charge of health issues for the opposition party, questioning Rachel Reeves, who handles financial matters for the government. Atkins was confused as to why Reeves suggested that a 22% pay increase for junior doctors would only amount to £350 million, when the Department of Health and Social Care estimated back in May that such a raise would actually cost over £1.7 billion.
I did receive a response (from the Treasury), and I added it as an update, but it was delayed and likely went unnoticed by most readers. Therefore, I will recap it here. The Treasury clarified that the £350 million mentioned by Reeves was the additional expense of the pay agreement for junior doctors, in addition to the cost of implementing the pay review body's suggestions for them.
The Times has claimed that the total expense of the salary agreement for junior physicians amounts to £1.1 billion, as reported today.
Rayner Limits Right To Buy, Not Abolishes
During her appearance on Radio 2, Angela Rayner, the deputy Prime Minister and housing secretary, mentioned that she intended to limit the right to buy scheme without completely eliminating it.
When asked about her opinion on the policy initiated by Margaret Thatcher's government that allowed council home tenants to purchase their houses at a reduced rate, Rayner mentioned that she was considering her options on how to address it.
The main difficulty we are facing right now is due to the changes made in 2012 to the right to buy policy. The increase in discounts has made it impossible for us to replace the social housing stock that is being sold off at a lower rate. This means that taxpayers are funding the creation of social homes, only for them to be sold off without being replaced.
We believe in the concept of the right to purchase because we feel that individuals who have lived in their homes for an extended period of time should have the option to buy them. However, we recognize that the current circumstances may not be sustainable, especially when considering the need to construct additional social housing.
Rayner Defends Removing Beauty Requirement In New Housing Rules
Vine mentioned that Labour has eliminated the "aesthetic" condition from the planning regulations.
This is absurd. The definition of beauty is completely subjective. In fact, the planning guidelines include many specific requirements for aligning with the surrounding environment.
The perception of beauty varies from person to person.
The blog discusses the importance of blending in with the surroundings, preserving the environment, and ensuring that buildings are secure, energy-efficient, and environmentally friendly. Developers must adhere to various guidelines and regulations to achieve these goals.
Attractive? Attractive doesn't hold much weight, as it can be interpreted differently from person to person.
Vine is questioning this. He says, "There are unattractive homes."
And they have navigated the system successfully, using their beauty.
The use of that language was only serving to hinder progress. That's why we believe it's too biased.
In reality, the regulations and standards in place require consultation and compliance with guidelines for building aesthetics, safety, and preserving the traditional Yorkshire brick architecture in our mill towns. These rules provide necessary protection.
I disagree with the notion that I will only construct unattractive homes. This belief is simply not accurate.
The initial version of the updated national planning policy framework released yesterday included a tracker tool indicating where language from the previous version had been removed. One notable change was the elimination of sections stating that homes or locations must be aesthetically pleasing. For instance, a specific passage was removed.
However, the document still contains numerous mentions of the significance of beauty in rural areas.
Jeremy Vine Interviews Rayner
Jeremy Vine is currently speaking with Angela Rayner on Radio 2.
Rayner begins by stating that the housing crisis impacts all families.
Q: How can increasing the number of houses being constructed lead to lower prices for buyers?
Rayner explains that the revisions to the national planning policy framework now demand the inclusion of affordable housing.
Vine shared a video where someone expressed concern about the possibility of the green belt disappearing permanently due to Labour's proposed policies.
Rayner explains that the government plans to prevent urban expansion into protected areas. Currently, only 30 local councils have a current urban plan in place. Rayner announces that all local authorities will be mandated to develop one.
Vine is inquiring about assertions that Tory neighborhoods are being impacted more than others. He references the situation in Fareham as an example.
Rayner explains that certain officials are finding that their goals are increasing due to their inability to meet the needs of their community. She points out that the Conservative party had made a commitment to construct 300,000 homes annually, but they have consistently fallen short of this target.
A: Why are less people visiting London?
Rayner believes that the goal set for London was absurd.
"Pensioners Can Keep Winter Fuel Payments With Eligible Benefits"
During her appearance on ITV's This Morning, Angela Rayner, who is the deputy Prime Minister, advised senior citizens who may lose their winter fuel payment to see if they qualify for pension credit.
In the latest update, the chancellor Rachel Reeves revealed on Monday that the government is planning to change the way pensioners receive the winter fuel payment. Rather than giving a set amount of up to £300 to all pensioners, it will now be based on their financial situation.
Rayner mentioned to ITV that the government did not want to do this, but they had to because of the terrible condition of the public money situation caused by the Conservatives. She advised pensioners to check if they could receive the benefits that would enable them to keep receiving the winter fuel payments.
There are many individuals who meet the requirements for pension credit but are not currently receiving it.
I want to encourage everyone listening to this to see if they qualify for pension credit. Many people are missing out on this benefit, but by checking, you could also receive the winter fuel payment.
Based on data from the government, just 63% of those who are able to receive pension credit actually apply for it.
Rayner Says 'nimby' Objections Will Fade With Infrastructure
Angela Rayner, who holds the positions of deputy Prime Minister and housing secretary, proposed that individuals may become more accepting of new housing developments in their neighborhoods if adequate infrastructure is provided.
During a chat on ITV's This Morning, Rayner stated that individuals aren't against new housing simply because they're selfish, but because they worry about the impact on local services and resources.
Rayner has revealed ideas to encourage a large rise in home construction. However, past administrations have struggled to bring this to fruition, in part because although voters generally support the idea of more houses being constructed, new developments often face strong resistance from local groups known as "nimby" (not in my back yard) campaigners.
Rayner suggested that concerns could diminish if individuals were not anxious about local streets, schools, and medical facilities becoming too crowded. She mentioned that the government is mandating councils to create current development blueprints, which would need to include infrastructure.
Every family in the UK currently has unmet housing needs. This is why people are not opposing new developments just for the sake of it.
People are questioning the decision to build more houses in areas that already have crowded roads and limited access to medical appointments. Infrastructure needs to be carefully considered in these situations.
And that's why our regulations will guarantee that we attain that necessary infrastructure, as I have taken into account the feedback from individuals who have emphasized the importance of having both new homes and the necessary infrastructure.
Pennycook Defends Cutting London Housing Targets
During his interview on LBC, Matthew Pennycook, the housing minister, supported the government's choice to reduce the housing goal for London from 100,000 new homes annually to 80,000. He provided insight into the reasoning behind this decision.
In the old system in London, each borough had to deal with the arbitrary increase of 35% in urban development, which was unique compared to other metropolitan areas in the country. This led to a total of approximately 100,000 new developments.
Our message to the mayor is simple: the current plan for London includes 52,000 homes, but only around 30,000 have been delivered so far. We believe the target should be 80,000 homes, which is a big challenge. I am urging the mayor and City Hall to step up their efforts and do more to meet this target.
Yesterday, Robert Colvile, who leads the Centre for Policy Studies, a conservative think tank, voiced his concerns on a discussion platform regarding the proposed plans for London. While the CPS supported the overall direction of Angela Rayner's announcements, Colvile believes the government should push for a higher number of new homes in the city.
His blog post begins at this point.
I really appreciate many aspects of Labour's housing reforms. However, I am deeply upset about their choice to exempt London from these changes. Here's a brief discussion about it. (1/?)
I really appreciate many aspects of Labour's housing reforms. However, I am extremely upset about the choice to exempt London from the reforms. Let me explain further in a short thread.
And now, let's take a look at some of the key points that he discusses.
When you hold power, you have the ability to disadvantage those who did not support you. It is just a part of life. The Conservative party implemented the 'urban uplift' policy, increasing housing targets to prioritize more homes in urban areas. In contrast, the Labour party has now taken a different approach.
The outcome can be seen in this graph (shared by @JenWilliams_FT) - housing goals increased in the North and rural areas, but decreased in major cities. The increase was 35%, which contributes to the variations in these statistics.
However, London stands out from other locations! It is the destination where many people are relocating, approximately 30% of migrants choose to move here. According to a chart shared by @NeilDotObrien in 2022, when considering population growth, it is clear that London is not constructing an adequate amount of housing.
Pennycook Denies Bias In Housing Targets For Tory Areas
During a discussion on LBC, Housing Minister Matthew Pennycook denied allegations that the recently established housing goals for local councils were influenced by political motives.
Yesterday, Angela Rayner, the deputy Prime Minister and housing secretary, announced changes to the method used to determine local housing goals. She released charts displaying the updated figures for each area, resulting in accusations that Conservative-leaning areas are being pressured to accommodate a significant increase in new homes.
During a show on LBC hosted by Nick Ferrari, it was mentioned that the number of new homes that need to be built annually in Fareham, represented by Suella Braverman, is set to increase from 115 to 794. In North Yorkshire (represented by Rishi Sunak), the target would rise from 1,360 to 4,230 homes, and in Hertsmere (represented by Oliver Dowden), it would go up from 277 to 959 homes.
When questioned about the significant fluctuations in the numbers, Pennycook shared the following response:
In the newly released consultation, we are suggesting a different approach to determining housing targets.
Currently, the housing targets are based on population estimates from 2014, which are considered outdated. This results in certain regions of the country, like the ones you mentioned, having very low targets for housing development, even though they are in need of growth.
We are updating our approach. We propose that every region should increase their current housing supply by a minimum of 0.8%. We are also considering affordability in this adjustment.
When questioned about the significant increase for Fareham, Pennycook defended the decision as necessary.
We are facing a shortage of homes leading to a housing crisis. Currently, 150,000 people are living in temporary accommodation and over a million are on the housing register. It is crucial that we address this crisis.
We were chosen with a clear promise to construct those houses, and additional areas of the country will need to step up their efforts.
Ferrari inquired whether political affiliations played a role in the situation. Pennycook answered:
Absolutely not, as our methodology is easy to follow and produces accurate results.
Housing Minister Calls For Early Construction In New Towns
The housing minister, Matthew Pennycook, was interviewed this morning on the Today programme and faced a series of doubtful questions from presenter Amol Rajan. Rajan highlighted that previous governments, including Labour and the coalition, had made promises about new towns that were never fulfilled. Here are the key points discussed in the interview.
Pennycook mentioned that construction of new homes in the new towns designated by the taskforce could potentially begin prior to the election. Rajan highlighted that Angela Rayner had previously expressed her desire for housing projects in these new towns to be completed within five years. When asked if this timeline was achievable, Pennycook commented:
I believe it is possible to start construction on many of these big new communities by the end of the current government term, and that is our goal.
He acknowledged that creating new towns alone would not completely solve the housing crisis. This came in response to a query from Rajan who referenced a blog post by Zack Simons on the Planoraks planning blog, discussing Labour's new towns policy. In his post from the previous month, Simons emphasized the limitations of relying solely on new town development to address housing issues.
We have a deficit of more than 4 million homes. If we tally up all the new towns constructed since 1950, there are less than 3 million residents living there. This shows that while new towns can have a significant impact, they are far from being a complete solution to our housing and development needs.
Pennycook mentioned that the recent announcement should be considered in relation to yesterday's news of increasing the target for new homes from 300,000 to 370,000 per year. He also mentioned that more announcements are expected in the future.
He stated that Labour had a good opportunity to be successful with new towns because they had a well-thought-out plan. He acknowledged that there were mistakes made by past governments when attempting to build new towns. He continued on to say:
However, we are confident in our ability to succeed where others have not because we have a detailed strategy to push this project forward, unlike in the past.
He rejected the idea that having many MPs from competitive districts would make it difficult for Labour to support building more homes. Those MPs understand that it is crucial to address the housing shortage, he stated.
Taskforce Appointed By Angela Rayner To Find Sites For New Towns In 12 Months
Hello! Parliament is beginning its summer break today. While many politicians are getting ready for a vacation after the election, the government remains hard at work. This morning, ministers are unveiling their proposal for creating a "new generation of new towns."
Angela Rayner, the second in command of the government and the person in charge of housing, is creating a special group called the new towns taskforce. This group has been given the job of finding locations for new towns in just one year. Leading this taskforce will be Sir Michael Lyons, an expert in economics who has held high positions in local government and the BBC. He has a lot of experience advising governments, especially on matters related to local government. Assisting him will be Dame Kate Barker, an economist who used to be a member of the Bank of England's committee on monetary policy. She has also led investigations into housing policy for previous governments.
The group of experts will suggest locations for building new towns. However, after reviewing the statement from the Department of Housing, Communities, and Local Government, it is evident that most of these new developments will not be entirely new towns, but rather expansions of current towns.
Rayner is also looking for these developments to include a 40% rate of affordable housing.
Describing the actions of the taskforce, the department states:
The plan for new towns will establish big communities with a minimum of 10,000 new houses each, some even larger. These areas have the potential to provide hundreds of thousands of affordable and well-built homes in the future, addressing the obstacles to development and enabling more working individuals throughout the nation to become homeowners.
The creation of new towns will boost the economic opportunities in towns and cities nationwide. The government is committed to promoting growth and revitalizing areas that have been limited in their expansion. The plan includes building new communities independently as well as expanding existing urban areas and revitalizing run-down areas to align with the local development trends.
These upcoming neighborhoods will follow a set of guidelines known as the 'new towns code' to ensure they are well-planned, environmentally friendly, and appealing places for residents. Developers will need to meet these standards to create well-connected communities with the necessary infrastructure and public services. Additionally, these towns will address housing shortages by prioritizing 40% affordable housing, especially focusing on affordable social rented homes.
Rayner will discuss this topic later today. She will be appearing on ITV's This Morning at 10:30am, followed by an appearance on Jeremy Vine's Radio 2 show at noon.
Otherwise, the blog section appears to be lacking content. However, we trust that the Universe will bring something new.
We are also discussing the Southport protests in another blog post written by Yohannes Lowe. You can find it here.
If you need to reach me, feel free to leave a comment below the line (BTL) or send me a message on X (Twitter). I may not be able to read every message BTL, but if you include the word "Andrew" in your message, I'm more likely to see it since I search for posts with that keyword. For urgent matters, it's best to contact me on X; notifications addressed to @AndrewSparrow will grab my attention quickly. I appreciate when readers point out errors, no matter how small, as well as when they ask interesting questions. While I can't guarantee a response to every question, I will do my best to answer as many as possible, either BTL or in a blog post.
